ROCKET BASES (Hansard, 10 December 1958)

§ Mr. Frank Allaun (Salford, East)
Most of this excellent and unanticipated debate has dealt with the war in Egypt. The Suez war was a shameful and disastrous business. I believe that when the General Election comes the Government will have to pay for it.
I want to speak about something which is even more important than an election, namely, whether our children will grow up to live happy, healthy and useful lives or whether they will finish up as part of a radioactive cinder heap. I want to deal, in particular, with the events which happened last weekend in Norfolk. I admit that I was opposed at the outset to the demonstration which took place at North Pickenham, and I will say why.
The guilty men are not the armament workers or building workers engaged on building missile bases. They are pawns in the game. Just like a journalist working for a newspaper whose policy he does not believe in, so these men are working for their bread and butter on jobs which many of them detest. I believe that the guilty men are Her Majesty's Ministers. The Government are responsible for deciding on the policy to build missile bases in this country, not the building workers.
My view, which I put to Pat Arrowsmith and other people engaged in this demonstration, was that it would divert attention from the really guilty men, the Government, and tend to lay the blame on the armament workers. I am not now sure that I was right. I believe that those people who took part in that demonstration this weekend did an extremely valuable service. They have done more to draw the attention of the people of the country to the fact that we are building these missile bases in our extremely vulnerable land than 477 any of us sitting on either side of the House.
I also feel that the scenes which were shown very clearly on television— whether one agrees with the demonstrators or not—have aroused very considerable admiration for their courage and conviction.

§ Mr. Emrys Hughes
Is my hon. Friend aware that they strongly deny the accusation by the Secretary of State for Air that they were violent?

§ Mr. Allaun
I certainly agree with that because, knowing these people personally, I know that they are mostly attracted by the methods of Gandhi and of non-violence and would be the last people to use violence themselves. I believe that sympathy has been drawn to them, however right or wrong we may think their acts, because of their "guts "; they were prepared to sleep out on such a night as that and to be dragged through the mud for their ideals. They have attracted sympathy for the facts that they did not resort to violence under any circumstances and that they have stated that they intend to stage a similar demonstration on 20th December.
As I understand, the object of this demonstration is to draw attention to the fact that we are building missile bases in this densely populated country of ours. I remind the House that it is the official policy of the Labour Party and the Trades Union Congress that we should press for the discontinuance of the building of missile sites in Britain until summit talks have taken place. As far as I know, that remains the official policy of this side of the House.

§ Brigadier Clarke
Will the hon. Member tell me what good it would be building missile sites after the assault had taken place? Surely it is the policy of the Labour Party to retain the hydrogen bomb. After all, they started it. If he gives all this credit to these people who were trying to stop this country from being defended, can he suggest any other way in which we could defend our country?

§ Mr. Allaun
The main answer to the hon. and gallant Member is that it is precisely because we are building missile bases here, and because we have here 478 the air bases from which British and American H-bombers may launch their bombs on another country, that we ourselves are in danger. I must ask the hon. and gallant Member this question: can he deny that if we use these bases to launch missiles from any part of this country, it is perfectly obvious that within a matter of hours, if not minutes, we shall get them back?

§ Brigadier Clarke
May I ask the hon. Member this: I am an ex-Army heavyweight boxer. Would he hit me if he thought I would hit him back? The answer is that he probably would not hit me first.

§ Mr. Allaun
I remind the House that the Government's original intention as declared was to build these missile bases in Scotland. That decision was dropped. I wonder why? In my view it was because the building trade workers in Aberdeen and branches of the plumbers' trade union and other key building trade union branches declared the job to be "black". The job was exceedingly unpopular there—so much so that the Government retreated to East Anglia. I should be glad if the same thing happened in East Anglia and every other part of the country. As we have been told by the right hon. Member for Woodford (Sir W. Churchill) before today, the building of atom bomb bases here—at that time the Government were not building the missile bases—makes our country extremely vulnerable.
Who controls these missile bases? We were told some time ago that this was a matter of joint consultation between the American and British Governments. It is perfectly clear to my mind, and, I think, to the mind of every intelligent Member, that there will be no time to consult this House. There will be no time to consult the members of the British Cabinet. They will not even have time to jump into their taxis. The decision will be taken by one man, and he will be the commander in the field.
My authority for saying that is Mr. John Foster Dulles who, speaking on 19th December, said that the decision to launch the bomb must be taken by the commander in the field, who in this case would be the American commander in the field. It is nonsense to say that there would be consultation between the Governments. All it means is that there 479 would be consultation in advance between the American and British Governments as to what circumstances would justify the launching of the rocket, but the last decision would be taken by one man. Personally, I have very little trust in decisions by such means, and I have very little faith in decisions on matters which may lead to the death of everyone in this country being placed in the hands of any one individual.
The Minister for Defence said in his White Paper for 1957 that in the nuclear age there is no adequate means of defending our country against attack. Later, he told us, speaking in Australia, that he would not bother to defend us but would concentrate on trying to defend the airstrips from which our planes would depart.
We have reached the third stage. Supposing we are blotted out before we had a chance to get our bombers off the ground or launch our missiles; we shall 480 no longer be able to retaliate. At this moment, lunatic as it seems, scientists are discussing how to launch H-bombs when we have been blotted out of existence— launching them possibly by heat or radioactivity from bombs already launched. They are discussing how to launch our bombs so that when we are dead it will still be possible to wipe out other countries. The hon. and gallant Member for Portsmouth, West (Brigadier Clarke) apparently thinks that it is a jolly good show. I think it is the higher lunacy, and the sooner this lunacy is ended the sooner we shall have the prospect of our children growing up to manhood and womanhood. I am quite sure that the sooner our country shows true greatness in saying that we are contracting out of this policy and ceasing to build these rocket bases, as my party has said, the sooner will the world heave a sigh of relief.